Christian Privilege

[Shiloh Raven]

Edited.

 

[grasping the after wind]

Your loaded question seems incoherent.

Parse this out and try to be concise.

Perhaps you have a different definition of incoherent than the standard one? If there is something about my question you do not understand I would contend that asking for clarification would be the best way to go about things. Accusing me of incoherence is a rather strange way of attempting to go about having a discussion. And ordering me to be concise is not only authoritarian but rude. If another atheist were to behave in a similar fashion , should a I assume that all atheist are rude authoritarians? That seems to be the gist of your argument about Christians. If two of a group do something bad , then the whole group is to be condemned. If you are trying to convey some other idea, it is not coming across. If so, perhaps you would be better advised to forget about concision and concentrate on precision. Though both would be appreciated. See how easy it is a to ask for something politely?

 

[Phil W]

I’m not sure what planet you’re on, but I’m adamantly opposed to killing homosexuals, slaves, victims of rape and unruly children. “God’s rules” are barbaric, and thank god atheist’s have higher moral standards.

What kind of moral standard doesn't come from an ultimate standard setter?
Or or are you on a sliding scale...like the Nazis who killed all the undesirables?

 

[HitchSlap]

What kind of moral standard doesn't come from an ultimate standard setter?

Every moral standard humans have ever described.
Claiming a god gave you morals doesn't make it so.

Or or are you on a sliding scale...like the Nazis who killed all the undesirables?

Right, I don't believe there's an "ultimate standard setter," so Nazis.

However, you do claim to worship a god that kills babies.

 

[HitchSlap]

Perhaps you have a different definition of incoherent than the standard one? If there is something about my question you do not understand I would contend that asking for clarification would be the best way to go about things. Accusing me of incoherence is a rather strange way of attempting to go about having a discussion. And ordering me to be concise is not only authoritarian but rude. If another atheist were to behave in a similar fashion , should a I assume that all atheist are rude authoritarians? That seems to be the gist of your argument about Christians. If two of a group do something bad , then the whole group is to be condemned. If you are trying to convey some other idea, it is not coming across. If so, perhaps you would be better advised to forget about concision and concentrate on precision. Though both would be appreciated. See how easy it is a to ask for something politely?

Yeah, it's more than just two... it's the entire gaggle of NIFB's. It's not just the hateful bigots at Westboro any longer.

 

[zippy2006]

The point I’m making is that no secular organisation could come close to getting away with the sort of behaviour we accept, and even expect, from Christianity and Christians.

Secularism is a first-generation offspring of of our society; religion is not. Secularism has no basis to challenge societal norms; religion does. The West has accorded religion a certain autonomy for a long time, and there are good reasons to do so. It is basically an allowance for a legitimate difference of opinion on a large, historical scale.

 

[durangodawood]

Ill repeat this once for you, HitchSlap:

If that cannot be done, there is nothing to the claims about Christianity supposedly doing or believing this or that. Obviously.

Why limit it to "denominations"?

Christianity is also what individual Christians do as motivated by their faith... especially in this era of "non denominational" churches.

 

[Strathos]

Ah, imposing Christian laws onto people based on religious convictions is different from Islam, how exactly? Maybe you’re unfamiliar with the history of Christianity, if you fail to see the similarities.

Tell you what, go and move to Saudi Arabia and see if you like it better than here, with all of our 'Christian privilege'.

 

[HitchSlap]

Tell you what, go and move to Saudi Arabia and see if you like it better than here,

No thank you.

with all of our 'Christian privilege'.

Yet, there are Christian's right here in the good 'ol usofa who would have no problem with the government executing homosexuals and unruly children.

Somehow I get the idea you're just as fond of secular governments bestowing equal rights as much as I am.

 

[durangodawood]

Tell you what, go and move to Saudi Arabia and see if you like it better than here, with all of our 'Christian privilege'.

No one said Christian privilege makes this the worst place in the world.

Of course I prefer the mild Christian privilege of the USA to the outrageous Muslim privilege of S.A. or Iran. But that doesnt validate privilege.

 

[HitchSlap]

Why limit it to "denominations"?

Christianity is also what individual Christians do as motivated by their faith... especially in this era of "non denominational" churches.

It's a red herring to avoid having to seriously discuss the implications of a Christian theocracy in the US.

 

[Paulos23]

Yet, there are Christian's right here in the good 'ol usofa who would have no problem with the government executing homosexuals and unruly children.

Heck. There is a Washington State legislature member would wants to round up all nonbelievers in camps for a final solution....

There are some SCARY Christains out there in positions of power and influence that don't get opposed by other Christians enough. And people wonder why nonbelievers worry about a Christian version of the Taliban happening here.

 

[Albion]

Why limit it to "denominations"?.

Because we are talking about Christianity, not a stray nutcase here or there. And earlier in this thread specific allegations about Christians generally were made. Almost any association can have a few deviants, and often there is not even a formal connection, but either way, this does not represent the nature of the organization in the least.

There are supposedly 30,000 or so church bodies in existence! So if it is nearly impossible to find any that reflect the views that someone is trying to pin on them, then we know for a fact that the charges against Christianity or Christians generally are contrived, not worth a second thought.

 

[Strathos]

No thank you.
Yet, there are Christian's right here in the good 'ol usofa who would have no problem with the government executing homosexuals and unruly children.

Somehow I get the idea you're just as fond of secular governments bestowing equal rights as much as I am.

And there are atheists in the US who would have no problem with making abortion at any stage of a pregnancy and for any reason whatsoever completely legal. Or even abortion after the baby is born.

Don't judge everyone by the worst extremists.

 

[durangodawood]

Because we are talking about Christianity, not a stray nutcase here or there. And earlier in this thread specific allegations about Christians generally were made. Almost any association can have a few deviants, and often there is not even a formal connection, but either way, this does not represent the nature of the organization in the least.

There are supposedly 30,000 or so church bodies in existence! So if it is nearly impossible to find any that reflect the views that someone is trying to pin on them, then we know for a fact that the charges against Christianity or Christians generally are contrived, not worth a second thought.

You do understand that this topic is not a broad brush attack on what Christians generally believe, right?

No, its a look at what beliefs Christians can get away with that we wouldnt tolerate from the rest of society.

 

[HitchSlap]

Heck. There is a Washington State legislature member would wants to round up all nonbelievers in camps for a final solution....

There are some SCARY Christains out there in positions of power and influence that don't get opposed by other Christians enough. And people wonder why nonbelievers worry about a Christian version of the Taliban happening here.

It seems that Christians are quick to condemn complacent Muslim's for not castigating radical terrorist acts in the name of Islam, but slow to call their own brethren on the carpet. The older I become, the more I appreciate the fact that the framer's of the US Constitution insisted on a secular republic. Unmitigated theocracies are hell on earth.

 

[HitchSlap]

And there are atheists in the US who would have no problem with making abortion at any stage of a pregnancy and for any reason whatsoever completely legal.

So you have no qualms with a government insisting that you must, or must not, have an abortion? This seems more sensible to you than giving women a choice regarding what's best them? That's the thing about individual rights, you can choose not to have an abortion if you don't want to. It becomes a problem when the government begins to pass laws effecting the rights of individual people. What if there's a point in time where the government passes a law where an abortion is mandated for women over forty? Would you be ok with this too? Or do you only have equanimity when the government passes laws that agree with your brand of theism?
(BTW, I expect you'll respond with all the usual Christian rhetoric, but all I ask is you give serious thought to the points I've brought up.)

As an aside, do you honestly think abortion would be legal if men had to carry the fetus, instead of women?

Or even abortion after the baby is born.

It's not an abortion after a baby is born.

(Your attempt to poison the well is noted.)

Don't judge everyone by the worst extremists.

Of course not, don't be absurd. I'm judging a privileged Christian society that provides a platform to spew bigotry and hate.

 

[Albion]

You do understand that this topic is not a broad brush attack on what Christians generally believe, right?

No, its a look at what beliefs Christians can get away with that we wouldnt tolerate from the rest of society.

Then show me those Christians. And in all fairness, it was not just individual Christians but Christianity itself that was indicted. So if there are, say, 200 million Christians of various denominations in this country do a majority of them believe in murdering people they don't like? How about half of them? So far two individuals have been accused and one of them apparently was falsely accused of saying that it is right to murder homosexuals. He at least vigorously denied condoning that.

So...how about any of the churches that Christians belong to which state that this is a policy they uphold? Which ones can you name for us?

 

[dzheremi]

It seems that Christians are quick to condemn complacent Muslim's for not castigating radical terrorist acts in the name of Islam, but slow to call their own brethren on the carpet.

Probably because in the USA, theocratically-minded legislators are so thin on the ground that they apparently go unnamed even by their non-religious critics (a "Washington State Legislator", who? What did they say? Name them so that we can shame them in this thread; I don't live in Washington and don't keep track of every dumb thing that might come out of a government official's mouth, Christian or not), whereas Islamist terrorism is thick in the societies in which Islam predominates. Even mid-level nutcase like Egyptian-Qatari Salafist preacher Wagdy Ghoneim has more than double the YouTube subscribers of this Steven Anderson guy...and that's just two random losers who are mostly famous for posting insane rantings on the internet.

Positing the coming of a Christian theocracy in America (because Trump's base believes XYZ, or opinion polls of GOP or Tea Party members reveal whatever, etc.) is simply not reasonable. The widespread public support is not there, and all indications I have seen to the contrary have to play fast and loose with the idea of what constitutes a 'theocracy' (e.g., does having a national religion officially declared make a place a theocracy by default? Then you'd do better to look to South American countries like Argentina and others for that in the Christian world; and from what I understand, Argentina is far from looking or behaving like Taliban-run Afghanistan).

 

[Albion]

Of course not, don't be absurd. I'm judging a privileged Christian society that provides a platform to spew bigotry and hate.

We are far, far away from the topic now, aren't we? For one thing, hate was not the topic and it is not a privilege nor confined to any particular group.

For another, it is not a Christian society unless the speaker finds it advantageous to say it is; the rest of the time, we hear about virtues of separation of Church and State and how we don't want a theocracy or nativity scenes or parochial schools or etc.! In any case, the legal standards are the doing of the State, not the Church.